UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Nov > Nov 29

Re: Melvin Brown And The MPs

From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch.nul>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 00:11:06 -0500
Archived: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:32:00 -0500
Subject: Re: Melvin Brown And The MPs


>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 19:51:40 -0800
>Subject: Re: Melvin Brown And The MPs

>>From: Bruce Hutchinson <bhutch.nul>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2007 23:09:07 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Melvin Brown And The MPs

>>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 12:05:03 EST
>>>Subject: Melvin Brown And The MPs

>>Over the years, the skeptics, the debunkers, and even the Air
>>Force has scoffed at the idea that some of the witnesses who
>>have claimed to seen the craft or the bodies at Roswell would
>>have been in a position to do so. Maybe the best example of
>>this is Melvin Brown who was assigned to the 509th Bomb
>>Group in July 1947 as a cook. The question they ask is, "Why
>>would a cook be out on guard duty?"

>>The question is not why a cook would be on guard duty; it is
>>why a cook, who claimed he was pressed into guard duty, would
>>be allowed such extraordinary access to the bodies and the
>>ship's debris.

>The usual debunking, "It's not in my personal experience,
>therefore it can't be."

>I myself have never seen a plane crash, a murder, a case of the
>bubonic plague, etc., etc. However, it would be rather foolish
>to doubt such things just because I had never personally seen
>them.

Conversely, the usual plea from the crash advocates; "there is a
remote possibility it might have happened, therefore it did."

>One hero of Pearl Harbor ...

And a horrific morning of carnage, destruction and horror is
analogous to The Incident how?

>I suspect not many privates will have the guts to tell a 4-star
>general to go to hell or threaten to shoot them if they don't
>back off. And not many 4-star generals I likely to take kindly
>to a teenage soldier threatening them or ordering them what to
>do.

Your lack of knowledge/experience in Military Security is only
too obvious, David. Just try and bully your way past an enlisted
MP at a military checkpoint. They truly do not care if you're a
4-star or what you think your importance is - if you are not "on
the list", you do not pass. Their ass is protected by military
law and if force is required, they are authorized use it
regardless of your rank. Fortunately, 4-stars are also well
versed in matters of security, and know better than to try and
force their way into places where they are not authorized. But,
if one should try...

>>A soldier (an engine mechanic, say...) who might pull guard
>>duty 2-3 times a year would not be able to properly secure such
>>an enormously sensitive post in times of extraordinary
>>circumstances.

>But Brown was more than "just a cook."

>Some actual facts on Sgt. Melvin Brown (from copies of his
>service record, in Timothy Good's "Alien Contact")

>Born: 1914 (therefore 33 years old at the time of Roswell, not
>some teenage MP) Enlisted: December 1939 (served in a gun battalion)
>Received MOS of cook: April 1943 Transferred to Asiatic Pacific
>Theater: June 1943

>Noted as being an Expert with M1 Carbine. Received the Bronze
>Star for Phillipine campaign. Noted as serving in battle in
>Northern Solomons.

>Point: Again, Brown was more than "just a cook

So now Mel Brown's real identity is now revealed as Steven Segal?

Sgt Brown's military history is totally immaterial. On a base
the size of RAAFB, he was Just A Cook. He could have been war
hero with a chest full of medals... once he put on the apron, he
was Just A Cook. In 1947, the base was well populated with
soldiers who had also been through the war and knew how to
handle a rifle- Brown was certainly not unique in that regard.
The idea that he was somehow special because he shot Expert in
Basic Training is stretching that argument well beyond the
breaking point.

>For all we know, maybe Brown did get trained and serve as an MP
>early in his military career, sure speculation, but at least
>based on something a little more substantial than "no way, no
>how, because I say so."

So long as you insist on going down this road of idle and
useless speculation, why not hypothesize that Brown was really
an undercover OSS agent... or that he was a secret agent for the
Alien Presence... or that he was really Naomi Maria Self in
disguise. All just as valid, and equally a waste of time.

>>Easley, if he was a competent commander, would have _only_ his
>>highly trained security troops or MPs guarding such a sensitive
>>building.

>Brown had been in the Army for almost 8 years at the time of the
>Roswell incident (3-1/2 years not as a cook) ...

Good Grief, David! Your contention is that Easley is going to go
out of his way to pick a cook who has seen very little if any
action for the last 4-1/2 years because of "his experience"??
Forgetting that he had hundreds of others to choose from, most
of them also war veterans with good if not better records and
some of whom have far more command experience? That is just
plain silly.

>>Had he done otherwise, like posting Brown, Blanchard
>>would have had his head on a stick!

>Blanchard would have needed a lot of free time on his hands to
>review and second-guess all decisions of his senior officers
>about personnel selections and other related matters. No,
>usually commanding officers delegate such authority and would
>have no reason to question such decisions later unless some
>collosal, compromising foul-up had occurred because of such
>decisions.

Like having the soldier who was supposed to guard the debris and
bodies from _the_ most important event in the history of
mankind- debris and bodies that already had attained the Very
Highest Security Level ever- desert his post to wander around
with an unauthorized officer? That would easily qualify as a
colossal foul-up worthy of extremely severe repercussions.

>But during the Roswell incident, according to testimony, in
>addition to their normal guard duties, they would be required to throw
>up multiple cordons to keep unauthorized people out. The debris field
>area had to be secured, plus access to it. The smaller north site also
>had to be secured, and in addition, a cordon running for perhaps 60
>miles north of Roswell was thrown up along Highway 285 to keep people
>from venturing off-highway. Extra security would also have to be
>thrown up around Hangar 84 (where testimony indicates bodies, debris,
>and a craft were taken) and the base hospital, and few other places as
>well.

Here again, your lack of understanding of the Military shows.
All military units go through repeated training over and over
and over again to insure that every man's response to any given
situation is as close to "by the book" as possible. Easley, as
the guy in charge of security, had many scenarios to consider
and, presumably, had drilled his men thoroughly for many
different possible events.

Yes... Yes... I know! "the book" had nothing in it about alien
saucers crashing in the back yard! But reacting to the very real
possibility of a plane carrying a nuclear bomb crashing off base
was surely one of the many scenarios for which he had trained
his men. He did not have to "wing it" to secure a crash site and
retrieve militarily sensitive debris, deal with the injured and
dead, and keep nosey spectators at a distance. His men were
already trained for just such a scenario, and he had plans in
place to deal with that kind of an event.

If those plans included requisitioning additional personnel from
the base, then Easley would already know where those extra men
would come from.

Yes - no Plan, however hard you try, goes off perfectly, and the
mark of a good commander is the ability to adapt to the
circumstances. But your scenario of confusion, desperation and
conscripted cooks just does not stand up to how a well run
command would have handled the alleged Incident.

>So suppose Brown's mess hall commanding officer is a friend who
>he completely trusts and Brown doesn't see any harm in maybe
>letting him have a quick look. Plus he's going to have a very
>had time shooting the guy if he persists and doesn't go away.

Which is _exactly_ why Easley would have never put in
inexperienced personnel to guard what was, at the time, _the_
most sensitive building in the nation. Brown=B4s purported actions
(as related by Beverly) demonstrates precisely why the whole
story smacks of being a tall tale. You have tried repeatedly to
make the argument that Easley wanted Brown=B4s "experience and
capability"... What Brown related demonstrates that Brown would
have been inexcusably incompetent.

>Anyway, that's the real, messy world I live in, not the fantasy
>world of debunkers who insist people must behave and things
>could go down in only one possible way.

And yet you feel compelled to concoct a fantasy world full of
"supposes", "possibles", "might haves" and "maybes" to somehow
get an Army Cook (that are generally exempt from guard duty by
SOP) with no security training assigned to a guard detail for
which he is totally and demonstratively unqualified.


Regards,

Bruce Hutchinson



Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast

See:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/subscribers/


[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com